“Copycat” layoffs won’t help tech companies or their employees

Post by scarface74 » Sun, Jan 22, 2023, 8:48 PM UTC

idopmstuff wrote: post #56

tarr11 wrote: post #31

The professor recommends across the board pay cuts as an alternative to layoffs. > One thing that Lincoln Electric, which is a famous manufacturer of arc welding equipment, did well is instead of laying off 10% of their workforce, they had everybody take a 10% wage cut except for senior management, which took a larger cut. So instead of giving 100% of the pain to 10% of the people, they give 100% of the people 10% of…

I think the problem with this strategy is that it causes the wrong people to leave. If you're a top performer, you're going to feel like a 10% pay cut is very unfair, and you're going to be able to get another job elsewhere fairly easily, even in this environment. If you're not performing particularly well, it probably doesn't feel as unreasonable, and even if you don't like it, it's tough to leave. When done correct…

Post by PragmaticPulp » Sun, Jan 22, 2023, 8:49 PM UTC

blagie wrote: post #123

idopmstuff wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the problem with this strategy is that it causes the wrong people to leave. If you're a top performer, you're going to feel like a 10% pay cut is very unfair, and you're going to be able to get another job elsewhere fairly easily, even in this environment. If you're not performing particularly well, it probably doesn't feel as unreasonable, and even if you don't like it, it's tough to leave. When done correct…

Having seen both, I'm much more likely to leave /after/ a layoff than after a 10% paycut. In abstract, if there were a way to rank employees by ROI and contribution perfectly fairly, I might not worry about layoffs personally. However: 1) In my career, I've never seen layoffs which were at all good at selecting the bottom 10%. Who gets dropped is pretty random. 2) I care about other people I work with. A 10% layoff m…

Post by scarface74 » Sun, Jan 22, 2023, 8:51 PM UTC

ejb999 wrote: post #161

tarr11 wrote: post #31

The professor recommends across the board pay cuts as an alternative to layoffs. > One thing that Lincoln Electric, which is a famous manufacturer of arc welding equipment, did well is instead of laying off 10% of their workforce, they had everybody take a 10% wage cut except for senior management, which took a larger cut. So instead of giving 100% of the pain to 10% of the people, they give 100% of the people 10% of…

>>The professor recommends across the board pay cuts as an alternative to layoffs. Terrible idea imo, there is almost no company that can't cut 5% of their staff without negatively impacting the company as a whole if done more or less right, you cut the people who are lower performers - or average performers who, thru no fault of their own, are not currently assigned to something that matters anymore to the company.…

Post by Tempest1981 » Sun, Jan 22, 2023, 8:53 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #168

s1artibartfast wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Isn't it better to have the same number of people and use them much better than a smaller number of people that are just as poorly used? Of course! But that is much easier said than done. If it was as simple as just telling managers find a use that will make money, everyone would do that instead.

Alas, probably not. A great example here is the NUMMI plant. In brief, Totota was kicking the collective asses of US carmakers. The techniques were not a trade secret; indeed, Toyota was happy to teach anybody. As part of that, they did a joint venture with GM called NUMMI, so they could show how they implemented core principles like "respect for people" and "continuous improvement". And it worked! Using the same bui…

Post by hluska » Sun, Jan 22, 2023, 8:58 PM UTC

super256 wrote: post #165

blagie wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having seen both, I'm much more likely to leave /after/ a layoff than after a 10% paycut. In abstract, if there were a way to rank employees by ROI and contribution perfectly fairly, I might not worry about layoffs personally. However: 1) In my career, I've never seen layoffs which were at all good at selecting the bottom 10%. Who gets dropped is pretty random. 2) I care about other people I work with. A 10% layoff m…

> Having seen both, I'm much more likely to leave /after/ a layoff than after a 10% paycut. Would you also stay when you get a pay cut, with the only reason being that the company wants to maintain a net margin above 30%? Because that is somewhat happening right now. Personally: I wouldn't.